logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.04.26 2015가합23128
손해배상 등
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 618,101,822 and its therefrom from May 11, 2016 to April 26, 2017.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the party in the position of the parties 1) The Plaintiff is the Gwangju Mine-gu A Apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

In order to manage the 8-dong 644 households, the autonomous management body consisting of their occupants, and the defendant B Co., Ltd. (Co., Ltd.) was established in installments on December 30, 2009.

Defendant B, regardless of whether it was established before or after the division.

(2) The apartment of this case was inspected on January 5, 2007, and Defendant B reported the sale of the apartment of this case on May 31, 201.

3) Defendant B on May 30, 2011, the Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation (the name before the change, the Korea Housing and Housing Guarantee Corporation; hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”).

B) As to the instant apartment, the guaranty creditor is the head of the Mine Office, and the guaranty creditor is KRW 325,201,968, and the warranty period is from May 30, 201 to January 4, 2017, which was ten years from the date of the inspection of the use of the instant apartment, and the warranty liability contract for the defects arising from the instant apartment within the said period (hereinafter “instant warranty liability contract”).

(B) After concluding the warranty and being issued a warranty, the guaranty creditor of the instant warranty contract, composed of the Plaintiff, was replaced by the head of the Mine Office to the Plaintiff. (B) Defendant B, while performing the construction of the instant apartment, failed to perform the construction work in accordance with the design drawing, or performed the construction work in a defective manner differently from the construction drawing or design drawing, resulting in a defect in the section for common use and section for exclusive use of the instant apartment, and resulting in a defect in the instant apartment.

2. The plaintiff requested the repair of the 10-year defect of the apartment of this case to Defendant B after the conversion into sale.

arrow